SCI 207

Water Quality

Name

SCI 207: Our Dependence upon the Environment

Instructor

Date

Introduction

Body paragraph #1: Background

Water is a commodity that everyone consumes on a daily basis all over the world. Water can be contaminated using biological, chemical, or human activities; thus affecting the health system of millions of individuals each day. It is therefore important to understand water quality and contamination and the impact of pollution on water. The lab will involve a deeper look at water quality, the process of treating water and the effects of groundwater contamination. The government has established agencies like Environmental Protection Agency which ensures that drinking water is safe for consumption and that the quality of water does meet the standard regulations. Water is obtained from different sources some of which may contain contaminants which flow through tap water in different quantities; some of this contaminant are very harmful to human consumption and difficult to trace because they are undetectable (Turk, 2014).

Human pollution is the major water contaminant given that people tend to dispose waste everywhere, which finally makes its way to the landfills and sewer system. The common mistakes people make is, for example, washing their cars outside especially on the drive way which causes oil to run into the nearby sewer system, or disposing of waste products such as those from a beauty shop which contain lotions, deodorants, and perfumes that contaminate water. Contaminated water has negative effects on human health. There is need to construct storm water facilities for treating through filtration and disinfection runoff. Only 3% of our water is fresh water; hence the commodity is precious to a human being (Landers, 2009). Having high quality water clean for consumption allows us to undertake our daily activities without complications of different type of diseases such as cholera, dysentery, and malaria. Researchers have carried out many different types of research aimed at improving the quality of water, and as such their knowledge is largely used today in rectifying the amount of unclean water passed from one individual to another, thus savings many lives.

Body paragraph#2: Objective

The objective of this experiment is to determine if contaminated water can be made clean and of good quality for consumption. Running series of test involving water that has been contaminated and after that cleansing, the water for safe drinking will be our main objective. By using various tool to clean the water, we will understand how the process used in making clean water. Therefore, we will determine the levels of contaminants and the outcome product to access if the contaminants were removed. Many companies involved in selling water bottle label their container as “pure” water, but in a real sense, the water contained in the bottle may not be pure water but tap water. The different companies offer varying prices for these bottled water depending on the plastic container used, transportation cost, storage costs, and the cost of bottling, but not according to the quality of water contained in the bottle (Rasekh, 2014).

Body paragraph #3: Hypotheses

The main reason for conducting the experiment is to see how contaminants affect the quality of ground water. Three different hypothesis will be evaluated; the first hypothesis is to determine if oil is dumped on the ground, then the soil will stop the oil from reaching the water and contaminating it. The experiment may take into account if laundry and vinegar detergent dumped on the ground, then the soil will fail to stop these detergents from contaminating ground water. The second hypothesis is; if water and soil mixture is passed through the filtration system, then no traces of soil will be available, this explains the fact that the filtration system will de-contaminate the unclean water. The third hypothesis is; if three different sources of water are tested for contaminants such as chemical, then tap water will have a high quantity of contaminants, followed by water from Dasani, and finally, Fiji water will contain the least contaminants (Gorman, 2012).

Materials and Methods

The materials consisted of a graduated cylinder, beakers, vinegar (10mL), stirring sticks, vegetable oil (10mL), soil, the liquid detergent used in laundry, funnel, scissors, water, and cheesecloth. It is therefore clear that the experiment was conducted at home using eScience lab kit materials. The place of the experiment was in a spacious room with a wide table. The objective being to test the ability of soil in removing vinegar, laundry detergent and vegetable oil from water before it reached the ground water.

The process of conducting the experiment involved labeling the beakers with letters from 1-8 for easier identification and to able to separate the containers. Half of the beakers were set aside for later use while the remaining were filled with different materials. Beaker number 1 was filled with only water, with beaker two filled with vegetable oil thoroughly mixed, beaker 3 contained vinegar thoroughly mixed, and beaker four was filled with laundry detergent.

The four beakers were filled with the right contents; the next step was to construct the filtration system with the layers of cheesecloth which were made big enough to fit in the funnel. Next, soil amounting to 60 mL were placed onto the four layers of cheesecloth, and the funnel was then placed into an empty beaker 5 to trap the contents passed from beaker 1. Results were recorded in table 1; water was allowed to flow from beaker 1 through the funnel for one minute. After that, soil and cheesecloth were separated from the funnel, and hot water with soap was used to wash the funnel. The experiment was repeated using the remaining beakers 2-4 with every experiment conducted separately and washing the funnel after each experiment was concluded while the observations were noted in table 1. The filtration of beaker 2-4 was made of beaker 6-8 respectively.

After recording observations from experiment 1, we moved to the next experiment using the eScience materials which included graduated cylinder, potting soil, gravel, beakers, activated charcoal, wooden stir stick, sand, funnel, bleach, alum, water, and stopwatch. The experiment involves similar techniques as wastewater treatment plants in testing how well the filtration method can clean the contaminated water.

In a 250 mL beaker, 100 mL of soil was placed in the beaker and water added up to 200 mL mark. The second beaker was used to mix the mixture in beaker one y transferring the mixture from beaker 1 to beaker 2 and vice versa 15 times. 10 mL of water that had been contaminated was poured into a 100 mL beaker to be used at the end of the filtration for comparison with the treated water. Alum was then added to the contaminated water and stirred thoroughly using the wooden stick for approximately 2 minutes; after that, the solution was allowed to sit for 15 minutes. The funnel was constructed using the four layers of cheesecloth lining. 40 mL of sand was then layered on the funnel before being activated using 20 mL of charcoal and 40 mL of gravel. For solidification, water was poured slowly through the filter to fill the funnel to the top. The funnel was allowed to sit for about 5 minutes on a beaker. Before proceeding with the experiment, the beaker was emptied out first, then three-quarter of the contaminated water was poured into the funnel. For 5 minutes, water was allowed to pass through the funnel. The water obtained after filtration had no smell compared to the ten mL of contaminated water set aside earlier. After filtration, drops of bleach was added to the filtered water, and the mixture stirred for about a minute.

The third experiment materials included; Fiji bottled water, Dasani bottled water, chloride test strips, ammonia test strips, phosphate test strips, beakers, 4-in-1 test strips, permanent marker, iron test strips, parafilm pipettes, tap water, stopwatch, and foil packets. The experiment was conducted in the same room as the previous ones. The aim of the experiment was to test the quality of the two bottled water and tap water by measuring their chemical components.

Three 250 mL beakers were labeled as tap water, Fiji and Dasani and water from each source being poured into the beaker 100 mL each. Next ammonia test trips were placed in the tap water moving the strips vigorously in water for 30 seconds, the test strips were then removed and any excess water removed was poured. The removed strips were then held for 30 minutes before they were turned pads facing away. The color of the strips was compared to the strip color in the chart. The same procedure was repeated for both Fiji and Dasani bottled water recording the results in table 2.

For the chloride test strips, the procedure involved submerging them into the reaction for a second; then the excess liquid was shaken off from the strip, whose color was then compared to the chart color after a minute. Repeating the same procedure using chloride test strips for Fiji and Dasani water, and the results were recorded in table 3. Next procedure involved the use of 4-in-1 test strips, by dipping them for 5 seconds into tap water. Strips were then removed from the water and excess water removed. After 20 seconds the color of the stripped water was compared to the color chart regarding pH, chorine, alkalinity, and hardness. The same procedure was then repeated for Fiji and Dasani water, and results recorded in table 4.

Next, the phosphate test strips, the strips were dipped in tap water for about 5 seconds; then the removed strips were held horizontally for 45 seconds before removing the excess water. After that, the color of the strip was compared to the chart color, and the procedure repeated for Fiji and Dasani water. Table 5 contains results from the experiment. The last strip to experiment was the iron test strips. Each beaker was filled with 30 mL of water, then one foil packet of powder was added to the beaker containing tap water, and the beaker was covered using a piece of parafilm and vigorously shook the beaker for 15 seconds. Parafilm was then removed, and iron test strip dipped into the tap water for about 5 seconds. The strip was then removed and excess water eliminated. After 10 seconds the color of the strip was compared to the chart color. The procedure was then repeated for Fiji and Dasani water, with the results recorded in table 6.

Results

Table 1: Water Observations (Smell, Color, Etc.)
Beaker	Observations
1	Color: clear Odor: non-existent The water is not contaminated.
2	Color: yellowish Odor: non-noticeable At first, a big bubble appears holding the vegetable oil at the top, once stirred oil mixed in but as it continued to settle. The oil rose to the top forming small bubbles.
3	Color: clear Odor: slight odor detected Remained mixed with the water, no segregation noted.
4	Color: green/blue Odor: slight odor detected Remained mixed after stirring with water, no segregation noted, formed suds.
5	Color: slight brown Odor: smell of soil Water passed through immediately; 70 mL passed through.
6	Color: slight brown Odor: no odor Water passed through immediately, about 5 seconds later a small gulp followed. No oil is observed. 70 mL passed through.
7	Color: slight brown Odor: odor exists Water passed through slowly, finished pouring water was still passing through. 80 mL passed through.
8	Color: dark brown/green Odor: detected Water passed slowly, after pouring the water continued to pass through the filter. For approximately the first ten seconds, the water was a slow stream, then dripped slowly for the remainder of the time and up to 60 seconds passed the one minute marker. Some detergent is noted as having passed through since suds were forming at the top. 70 mL passed through.

Table 2: Ammonia Test Results
Water Sample	Test Results
Tap Water	0 mg/L
Dasani® Bottled Water	0 mg/L
Fiji® Bottled Water	0 mg/L

Table 3: Chloride Test Results
Water Sample	Test Results
Tap Water	0 mg/L
Dasani® Bottled Water	0 mg/L
Fiji® Bottled Water	0 mg/L

Table 4: 4 in 1 Test Results
Water Sample	pH	Total Alkalinity mg/L	Total Chlorine mg/L	Total Hardness mg/L
Tap Water	.2	80	1.0	50
Dasani® Bottled Water	3	40	0	50
Fiji® Bottled Water	8	40	.2	50

Table 5: Phosphate Test Results
Water Sample	Test Results
Tap Water	10 ppm
Dasani® Bottled Water	50 ppm
Fiji® Bottled Water	50 ppm

Table 6: Iron Test Results
Water Sample	Test Results
Tap Water	0 ppm
Dasani® Bottled Water	0 ppm
Fiji® Bottled Water	0 ppm

Body paragraph:

The first two experiment confirmed that contaminated water could be cleaned or filtered to provide clean drinking water, while the third experiment illustrated thee fact that tap water has the lowest level of pH compared Fiji water which contains high pH. The alkalinity of Dasani and Fiji water was 40 each while that of tap water was 80. Chlorine level in tap water was 1.0, Fiji was 0.2 and Dasani 0.0. The hardness of the three types of water was the same at 50.

Discussion: Body paragraph:

The first experiment hypothesis was to determine if the contaminated water was passing through the ground, the ground was to act as a filtration system to remove the contaminant. The result of the experiment indicated no presence of vinegar, vegetable oil or laundry in the collected water, and a given portion of the contaminated water remained in the soil; thus the hypothesis was accepted. The second experiment was to determine if the filtration process would decontaminate contaminated water. After the experiment, the comparison between treated water and the set aside contaminated water indicated that treated water was decontaminated; hence the hypothesis was accepted. The third hypothesis was to determine if tap water contains most contaminants, followed by Dasani water, then Fiji water. The results of the experiment concluded that tap water was the most contaminated with a pH level of 0.2, chlorine at 1.0 and alkaline of 80, followed by Dasani and Fiji water was the least contaminated; thus the hypothesis was accepted.

Body paragraph#2: Context

The experiments aimed at the utilization of filtration systems used by different water companies. The results indicated that bottle water also contains a given percentage of contaminants despite them being sold at different prices. The issue being many bottle water companies do not decontaminate their water before packaging thus the possibility of buying tap water at a cost instead of consuming the free tap water available at our homes.

Body paragraph#3: Variable and Future Experiments

The experiments were conducted on different days but at the same time. The weather conditions were favorable and thus did not hinder the outcome of the results obtained. The workplace was kept tidy and clean out of reach for outside contaminants. All materials used were first cleaned before conducting the experiments.

Conclusion

The experiments enlightened me on the importance of drinking on clean water and not just any type of water. Contaminants found in water some are invisible and very dangerous for human consumption. I learned the importance of having a well-constructed filtration system would aid in cleaning the water for safe drinking. After the experiment, it now clear the fact that tap water is cheap and readily available does not mean that it is unsafe for drinking given the fact that bottled water might still be tap water packaged in a bottle.

References

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), (2015). Current Drinking Water Regulations. Retrievedfrom;http://www2.epa.gov/regulatory-information-topic/water#drinkingMay 26, 2015.

Gorman, R. (2012). Is your tap water safe?. Good Housekeeping, 254(3), 130.

Landers, J. (2009). Malibu Park will detain runoff, improve treatment facility operation. Civil Engineering (08857024), 79(12), 24-26.

Matos de Queiroz, J., de França Doria, M., Rosenberg, M., Heller, L., & Zhouri, A. (2013). Perceptions of bottled water consumers in three Brazilian municipalities. Journal of Water & Health, 11(3), 520-531. doi:10.2166/wh.2013.222

Rasekh, A., Shafiee, M., Zechman, E., & Brumbelow, K. (2014). Sociotechnical risk assessment

for water distribution system contamination threats. Journal of Hydroinformatics, 16(3),

531-549. doi:10.2166/hydro.2013.023

Turk, J., & Bensel. T. (2014). Contemporary environmental issues (2nd ed.) [Electronic version].San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc.